19K30

Comparing what happened with the 5th Bomb Wing and the AGM-129s and to a company at NTC is comparing apples to oranges. Funny you should bring that up because my father spend 30 years in the USAF working mainly on B-52s and I spend a lot of my childhood in Minot AFB. He knows exactly how that happened, why it happened, and how it should have been prevented. It is much more simple than removing 10-14 packs, splitting the transmission from the engine, putting the packs back together and reinstalling them. And guess what, pretty much everyone in that chain of command got fired, not from their job, but from the Air Force. Even the Secretary of the Air Force lost his job over that. I'm not going to say the exact reason that incident happened, but it was pretty much an E-3 not paying attention and NCO leadership not doing their job. Much different situation than this event that is discussed. But I am not going to argue over the internet about this anymore. I provided a rational, logical reason for disagreement with an outlandish claim. People can decide for themselves what to believe.

I think you failed to see my point about an entire company having governors removed is like, not going to happen... 10-14 governors removed on packs in tanks that have their packs changed left and right due to the tons of use they get? I mentioned more than safety issues and rules. One tank? Two tanks? Maybe. An entire company in formation? Sorry I've been doing this job WAY too long to not be able to sniff out some BS. If he said 35-40 MPH I could buy that. 75? Please. The armor community is way too small somewhere along the line I would have heard from someone about the company that wend 75 mph in formation at NTC. Something like that is story worthy. Joe would be telling and retelling that story for decades. The safety issues were just logic talking, but the company worth of tanks with governors removed? That is just not going to happen. Also I read the rest of the story. An OC at NTC if having witnessed that would do much more than chew a commander's ass. That is bad news. Safety is taken so serious at NTC, it is somewhat ridiculous. serious UCMJ actions would be taken for that. Hell, the Battalion commander would feel the wrath for having a company commander doing something so stupid. Those youtube vids you are bringing up aren't company sized formations in a mock battle. Like you said it is people showing off for a camera, that is a VERY different situation. One tank out doing some dumb stuff, I've seen that, it happens. An 0-3 leading a company to do that in a situation that is heavily monitored by OCs and tons of brass watching and BLUFOR Trackers etc.? Hell no. Sorry you can't convince me that would happen. Might be a little more believable if it was in the back yard, (home station training area) where you don't have God and everyone else monitoring you. Have you been to NTC/JRTC/CMTC?

I can't believe I just read this. You did not drive an M1 series tank in a company formation at 75 MPH at the National Training Center. Your post contradicts its self. You just need to be on terrain where its safe to drive these speeds No where in the box at Fort Irwin is is safe to get tanks at such a high speed. There are speed limits there for a reason, people die hitting the wadis all the time. New wadis are forming all the time so it is not possible for them to be mapped. Any tank commander that would travel at a high rate of speed in that terrain has little regard for the safety of his crew or himself, let alone for the well being of his tank. Any company commander that would order his company to travel at such a high rate of speed should be relived because of all the lives and millions of dollars of government equipment he is putting at risk. No unit is allowed to travel or does travel in NTC without at least one Observer Controller. If a company sized unit began traveling this fast he would call a total stop of training faster than if a desert tortoise was spotted on top of the Peanut. Tactically it does not make sense to move your company at "75mph." Especially cross country. In an assault or movement to contact why would you want to close the distance between you and the enemy so fast when stand-off is one of your best assets? As a gunner I found it harder to scan the faster we went, I couldn't imagine scanning at "75mph." Although not always the case, more than likely while in the field, especially on a training center rotation, your company is in a task organized company team with an infantry platoon. Brads can't keep up at that speed. What about the engineer platoon you more than likely have attached to you as well in 113's one of witch is towing a MICLC? Traveling at that speed you are getting pretty far from your medics and mechanics (that you will need when your tanks start going airborne over wadis.) Do you not need to call for fire support so that is why you are leaving your FIST-V in the dust? Is your X-Ray (or what ever your call sign for the 67 vehicle) just back with the other guys in your company you are leaving in the dust? Removing the governor for the AGT-1500 is not that easy of a process, it is not something your line mechanics or BN Maintenance guys can really do. I highly doubt at least 10 or possibly 14 packs had this removed at the NTC. I'm sure you used the draw tanks. Unlikely that one would have the governor removed, let alone an entire company's worth, or if 10-14 tanks had this removed the odds of all of them being drawn for the same company is even greater. I was in Kuwait in 1998 doing some operations in the Udari Desert. A tank in my company was traveling around 30 MPH and hit a small wadi at that speed. A torsion bar was broken among other things, but more importantly, the loader lost teeth hitting his mouth on the 240 mount, the gunner flew into the breech, bruising his elbow i think, and the TC fell down into the turret (he was standing at waist level) and hit his knee on the TC arm rest or TC panel or something and tore his ACL. We were down an experienced wingman because of an accident and that was only at 30 mph. Is it possible for an ungoverned M1 series tank to go 75mph? Sure, maybe, I don't know. Did you do it in a company formation in a tactical situation at the National Training Center? I think Penn and Teller can answer that one.

I just want to be different and say the Kuwaiti National Guard's M-84AB or M-84D that were made in Yugoslavia. Or the Polish built, traded to Libya, sent to Uganda, seized by South Africa, given to Rhodesia T-55s for some African Bush Wars scenarios.

As to that note I couldn't imagine being an American Air Defense soldier, knowing there is a 98% chance I will never do my primary job in combat. But that is a subject for a different discussion.

Isn't that the truth.. Before I used FBCB2 I was told of all these features it had. Then I got it and discovered I was greatly exaggerated to. I have no clue scientifically about the principles of the next gen FLIR so I can't even begin to imagine how it does its seeing. I would hope though that your government isn't going to spend money on a system that isn't effective against every possible threat. So in that respect I'm sure this was just another exaggeration in the world of the military.

What you are saying is very true. Although I must tell you that no matter what you do hiding the heat signature of an M1 series tank is pretty much impossible, so you can see as how in my situation it is very low on my priorities list as a tank commander and am more concerned with ensuring my weapons systems are operational, making sure my tank is mobile, making sure my crew know the mission in case I am incapacitated, making sure my communications are operational. I am responsible for a lot of things in the precious moments before LD or before the enemy crosses their LD. Spending time on something that isn't going to give me an advantage in the long run is not something I really want to do. Although I do see the need for it for other armies. I believe you mean the bombing of the Serbians in 1999 not 1995 correct? Camouflage defiantly greatly helped them to not have their army decimated, but it wasn't all camo, in my opinion a lot of politics interfering with ROE and a poorly managed war greatly affected the outcome of that conflict that I don't think should have happened. But I don't want to get into the politics of that. But the Russians were on the offense in Georgia, I hardly think they needed to camo up their tanks for an offensive fight.

I have never in my life looked at a vehicle with those nets through the TIS (which is not the best thermal in the world, I wish the TTS that retrofitted in the M60A3s was put in the M1s) however, I was recently in discussions with some people and we were talking about this subject and I was told that the next generation FLIR sights that are on the M1A2 SEP, ITAS TOW System, and I think the CLU of the Javelin defeats this netting because it uses a different system of "seeing." Not sure if this is true or not though it might have been some hopeful boasting. Do you know if this is true or not by any chance?

I will admit that most of my fighting has been done in desert/urban environments where putting tree branches on your tank would be useless. You really aren't going to blend in anywhere in a city or a desert with some trees attached to your tank. However, in wooded areas I have operated in (Fort Stewart, GA, Fort Lewis, WA, Fort Polk, LA, CMTC in Germany) we never did this, and never suffered because of it either. I've never been on one of your vehicles so I definetly can't speak for it, and I'm sure it works for what you do, but I am not sure if you have been around an M1 Series tank and gotten to crawl around on one, but there is not really anywhere you can put things like tree branches etc. that won't interfere with the operation of the tank. You can stick branches in the rails on the side of the turret sponsen boxes that usually have cammo nets and poles (in cases) along with some duffel bags hanging on the side, but it is not really going to break up the profile of the tank all that well. Maybe on the rails at the back of the bussell rack but all you are going to end up with is something that looks like a M1 Abrams with some bushes on the side of it. The M1 wasn't really built for camouflaging. Another thing that comes into play is optics. In 1999 I was at JRTC in Fort Polk and some German Paratroopers were there with their Weasel vehicles. Very small and were completely camouflaged while we were conducting a rearward passage of lines to move to another area of operations. I was a gunner at the time and despite the fact they were in a heavily wooded area with every kind of vegetation you could think of concealing them, I was able to pick them up immediately in the TIS. You can't hide heat.

Interesting, I have been crewing tanks for over 13 years, in all terrains, and I have never in my life used anything to break up the profile of my tank. Especially not in the offense. All that crap would just fall off on the move, and just get in the way in general. I guess maybe in the defense in a wooded area this MIGHT give you some advantage until contact is made, but again it is just going to fly off when the gun starts firing, or when you move to your secondary fighting position. I wouldn't call that lackadaisical at all, just not wasting valuable time you could be doing Troop Leading Procedures and preparing for combat operations.

As said before commands for the driver in the US Army are very, very informal. Basically you tell the driver to do what you want him to do and how you want him to do it in a manner he understands. Telling the gunner and loader what to do are much more formal, well officially anyways, in actual combat it is pretty much the same as what it is with the driver, tell everybody what to do in a matter they can understand. As an experienced crew you should know what to do anyways. Formal Fire Commands used to be used at all times until it was authorized for the abbreviated fire command to be used during gunnery. The Formal Fire Command is very long but in normally abbreviated to the only needed parts if all systems are functional. It Starts with the "Alert" IE: Who you are talking to GUNNER LOADER FROM MY POSITION The next part that must be used is the ammo you will be using. This is omitted if the Tank Commander is engaging the target himself. SABOT HEAT COAX 240 (Loader's Weapon) Next is the Target Type that will be engaged TANK PC TRUCK TROOPS CHOPPER BUNKER If there is more than one target the Tank Commander will say how many of the targets he wants engaged and which one he wants engaged first. IE 2 TANKS LEFT TANK FIRST or 2 TANKS NEAR TANK FIRST At this point the Loader either arms the gun if there is a round battle carried or loads the round type ordered and arms the gun. Once the gun is armed and the loader ensures he is out of the path of the breech the loader announces: UP! The Gunner (or Loader) targets the target and lets the Tank Commander know they have found the intended target by announcing: IDENTIFIED The gunner places the reticule center mass of the target. The Commander then checks for a good sight picture and gives the command to Fire FIRE or if he wants the loader to load a different ammo type he will say the new ammo type after "fire" FIRE, FIRE SABOT FIRE, FIRE HEAT The gunner then alerts the crew that he is going to fire ON THE WAY (The Loader does not say on the way) The Tank Commander watches the shot. If the target is hit he announces TARGET If the target is missed the Tank Commander announces where the round went RIGHT LEFT SHORTLINE OVERLINE or if he did not observe the path of the round LOST If the target is destroyed the Tank Commander announces CEASE FIRE this ends the fire sequence If there is another target to destroy he will announce the target is hit and then instruct to fire on the next target TARGET, LEFT TANK (The IDENTIFIED, UP, and FIRE commands are all repeated) If the first target is missed and the Tank Commander want the target engaged again he announces REENGAGE (The IDENTIFIED, UP, and FIRE commands are all repeated) If the Tank Commander wants the Gunner to engage targets on his own he when he gets to the "Fire" part of the fire command he commands: FIRE AND ADJUST The gunner then is instructed to engage targets on his own until ordered "Cease Fire" If the tank commander is engaging targets with the .50 he alerts the crew: CALIBER FIFTY This is the entire fire command for this weapon system Here are some examples of full up fire commands GUNNER SABOT TANK UP IDENTIFIED FIRE ON THE WAY TARGET CEASE FIRE GUNNER SABOT 2 TANKS NEAR TANK FIRST UP IDENTIFIED FIRE ON THE WAY TARGET FAR TANK UP FIRE ON THE WAY TARGET CEASE FIRE GUNNER COAX TROOPS IDENTIFIED FIRE ON THE WAY TARGET CEASE FIRE If Sabot is battle carried and a miss occurs GUNNER SABOT PC UP IDENTIFIED FIRE FIRE HEAT ON THE WAY LOST HEAT UP REENGAGE IDENTIFIED FIRE ON THE WAY TARGET CEASE FIRE At anytime the Tank Commander can order the type of ammunition loaded in the tube (a lot of time this is directed by the Platoon Leader or Company Commander) The formal way to say this is: BATTLECARRY (round type) At any time the Tank Commander can ask for a "crew report" by saying CREW REPORT The crew responds in this order, giving his status: DRIVER READY LOADER READY (ammo type) LOADED GUNNER READY (ammo type or coax) INDEXED The Tank Commander then announces TC READY This ensures the tank commander that his tank is at "Readiness Condition 1" or REDCON 1. The code word for ready to fight. The abbreviated fire command is normally used in the offense it basicy goes like this: target type, up, identified, fire, on the way ie: TANK UP IDENTIFIED FIRE ON THE WAY TARGET CEASE FIRE If there is more than one target type presented remember to always engage the most dangerous target first. IE Tanks before PCs, PCs before troops, near tanks before far tanks However it is not always as easy as that as a BTR-80 might seem more dangerous than its troops it just dropped off, but if those troops are carrying an AT-5, you need to kill them first. It is important to remember everything I just listed are the commands for when you have a full up system. Commands change when any system is not working. With a degraded system abbreviated fire commands are not used. I will post the degraded fire commands next

The loader's 240 in the M1 series tank is an interesting situation. While taking Baghdad I ordered my loader to engage infantry with the weapon. In the situation we were in I made the decision as a tank commander that I would rather have another sector covered by an available weapon system than have my loader sitting in the turret doing nothing in the middle of a fight where loading the main gun was not a priority. However, in my entire career I have on done one Tank Table V where the loader's engagement was actually conducted. So my loader had never live fired the weapon before, and it has no sights. Engaging targets with it is very difficult. We both, (the loader and myself) encountered better success in this fight with our M4s than with the larger caliber crew served weapons.